ah, in russia starts with drawing his troops from the border with ukraine as military exercises draw to a close. thus, despite daily alarmist western predictions of an imminent russian invasion, we have not yet verified the russian military units are returning to their home base. despite the major pullback of russian troops, the white house doesn't yet see the escalation. we joe biden saying he wants more proof of the canadian prime minister triggers a never before used emergencies are renting his government extra powers to break up a truck. his protests fighting back the mandate is great concern among provincial cheese to question measures, points on legitimacy. we don't believe this is necessary and operative. we think it could actually be someone counterproductive. it is not legitimate and it is useless

. and after a week of pressure and certainly the over doping allegations 15 year old russian figure skating star camila valley ever sits in 1st place. and the thing goes competition at the beijing which really makes those yeah, headlines. it's 6 there. moscow time. feel free to head over to r t dot com for more on those stories. i'll be back with another look in about half an hour. ah. hello and welcome to cross stop where all things are considered. i'm peter the mill for months the u. s. in the u. k, have warned that russia may invade ukraine,

and yet there's been no invasion for their part. the russians have made it abundantly clear. europe's current security arrangement is untenable. the anglo saxon powers talk of war. russia talks about security. ah, discuss these issues and more. i'm joined by my guess. i've been in washington, he's a senior fellow at the independent institute in kingston. we have nichol, i petro, he is a professor of political science at the university of rhode island. and here in moscow we have maxine switch off. he is director of the center for advanced american studies at moscow state institute of international relations. original in cross roles and the fact that means you can jump anytime you want. and i always appreciated, or i would like, you know, it's really interesting to me watching this on a month long, imminent invasion, a messaging from the u. k. and the u. s. everybody is talking about

a russian invasion of ukraine, except for ukraine and russia are not. i mean, how do you explain? yeah, clearly and zelinski and his cabinet are not singing to the same hymn book. and that has been a source, as we read in the press of frustration in the united states, because the rest of the nato allies are predictably following along like that's about. so, you know, like you say, the bottom line is that there is not going to be an invasion. and that leaves me for me at least the most important question is, what do we do afterwards? what if worse comes to worst and there's no rush an invasion? i'm going to look, i'm going to look for, for american ford, both. i really don't know how we're going to get out of this situation. i mean,

you know, why is it the u. s. in the u. k. spearheading this year because we have had on 2 occasions that we know of publicly then you know, zalinski is not on board as nichol i just said here and he's actually pushing back saying it's damaging his economy. and why would you trust your major patrons if you're evacuating your dependence from the country? i mean, and you're not a member of nato, and they're not going to send you troops. i mean, how do you unravel all of that? go ahead. i'm anyone in? well, i think the both ukrainian and nato people are doing what they see is in their best interest. and of course, the zones he has to create a public, a sense of calm. where's the nato allies want to deter any possible attack?

which i don't, which i don't think is impossible here because we have, there's troops there, there's even the logistics, the blood, the, the hostile. so the stuff that you would do if you were actually not just an exercise, but an invasion. so, you know, they're looking at the intelligence nato is looking at the intelligence and saying, well, you know, this is very possible. so, and we want to deter it. so we're going to be, you know, we're going to be as forceful in our public relations campaign to try to deter this . and of course, zalinski is in the opposite position. he might support that behind the scenes, but he has to publicly say, well i'm, you know, i have to keep the car, keep things calm, the economy going, et cetera. well, i mean, even if i can stay with you, i mean a part of my question is why is the u. s. u k spearheading this? i mean, everyone else is kind of taking their laying out their role here. but the, the u. s. new cases, particularly interested even to the point of hoping for some kind of conflict or

maybe i'm wrong. go ahead. how do you as to that? well, i don't think they hope hope for conflict. i think they're expecting one and i think they're pushing back on it. and that's, you know, that's leading, i mean, the us is the leader of the alliance, and people work to the united states, united states, even back during the cold war, was more concerned with other areas than the countries involved. and i think, you know, the, the russian energy and cook is important in that the russians i have 40 percent export, 40 percent of the europe gas and 25 percent of the oil. so i think, you know, other countries have more mixed you of these things. britain and us are of course, geographically more separated from, from europe. and then rather they wouldn't, they wouldn't suffer any of the consequences. they are what they want. others to do . ok, that's clear here. max, i mean i guess if nothing happens,

then the west one you were the deterred invasion. i mean, if they play this up because also my cards everyone, i think this is just been a propaganda effort more than anything else. ok. i mean, sending 3000 troops to poland and, you know, and that's not a major strategic statement considering poland is in nato itself. here. so maxine, i mean, everyone else is playing the role. the russians haven't done anything but the, the, by the administration, the johnson administration will probably declare victory by the end of the week. what do you say? why do maryland declare with 3 a russians are serious about the security guarantees, and they're not getting any. so i don't think this will be all the easily even of any one of the vitamin for now we see that in the face of the legend, russian,

the united states tremendous har to the printer. so security instability, virtually and still in the no fly. so, oh, you're great, now that the insurance companies refuse to give the transfer also, you know, the national currency is down. and i think the 2 things that are missing from the conversation of russian station is a one time political interest with the russians want to pursue through the nation. that is not clear. and most important, perhaps what i think is missing in the west. worse is what kind of military maneuvers ukrainian forces do as of yesterday or the credit military read it with $300.00 from best to reach and closer to dawn back a might be some potential and of course

it still. it also shows some kind of preparation for some time with the construction. or there might be a major russian stroke to respond and really late in that case. and those are scenario. so i think that's a very clear quote, a part of ukraine that can, has no control over the since 2015 nichol. i, you hear this phrase a europe, whole and free. but ever since the end of the cold war that has been pursued ok, not including russia, actually excluding russia intentionally. how can you have a europe that's free and whole impression is excluded? you can't. and that is the point made by russian foreign

ministry and coach. and it is also rhetorically been accepted by a number of western leaders. but they haven't been able to get around. what i think is the major objection. i remember, lord is may's famous quote, that nato was created to keep it, and the americans in the germans down and the russians out. and that really, unfortunately, hasn't changed since the end of the cold war. if russia were ever to become a part of nato, or to have any serious voice in nato, it would mean a degradation of american power and influence in the region. and i think that's what ultimately, the bigger picture is all about. i don't think america really gives a hoot about what is happening. what could happen in ukraine, as long as it maintains it's not always distance, but

a certain hostility toward russia. everything will be fine. they're generally don't care about the human rights situation there, which is gone berserk there with the closing of 6 major television channels, opposition, ours and childs and not moms. the word here in the west about that, i think the bigger picture from the united states is exactly a maintaining the status quo, and nato not engaging with. ready russia on the issue of broader european security and the entire education around ukraine helps to make the case for the united states as united states, as a vital leader is avenue. and is that sustainable? i mean, you know, you can talk about intimate invasion, but just for so long. i know you can have a little until the next election, but a whole week here and that's one. that's one conclusion. i mean,

even what your thoughts on well, i think my own d as always been that nato expansion is a mistake. and that russia should have been brought into the post war post cold war and european structure as the in the congress of vienna, rather than after world war one, where they closed out germany. and we had a big problem and were war 2. but we should have filed the congress of vienna and 1815, where napoleonic france was brought back into the european structure. and i thought that should have happened and after the cold war. but i'm not sure, i hope there's not going to be an invasion because i think it's a bad move for, for russia to do that. now, simply because i think you're going to get pushback, guerrilla warfare, if they do a full invasion, and you're also going to get, you know, lots of sanctions. and those sanctions will eventually, do, you know, less than as, as russia copes with them. but still it's going to be economic pain there for

a long time. and i think there are, you know, the whole thing goes down the tubes. it's true, i think rush as legitimate security concerns. and i don't think they have been listened to, but i'm not sure if this is a good approach that that garage is now taking on that team. i don't see that rush has had a whole lot of choice. so over the last few months we've had war, hysteria hyperbole, you know, they see an, an rolls out all the graphics and all that. it's a big show and all that. but for it was far as russians concerned. nothing has changed because the west isn't a reply in constructively to insecurity demand. 2 letters that were sent out on december 17th, one to the european, one to nato, and one to the united states. nothing's been done on that and that realm. go ahead . no, i think my colleague wrote a congress and they were one

for this is that those cases are not internally clickable in russia. situation because both france and germany were defeated and it was, you know, they were pretty much in the stage of the winners and it was a matter of how will handle that. did you, did the rush in late nineties in late nineties, embarrassed. feel now that the cold war ended in kind of mutual consent agreed to democratize and do this stuff. so russia was not supposed to do a power loss, even though obviously the western mindset lost the cold war. but the expectations were different. so now is time is kind of the 3rd time since the end of the cold war to review the secure border in europe. that was how i'm favorable to rush. and because nobody really cares a certain point. and that's why we've gotten to this point here. i

mean, it's unsustainable, as i said, in my introduction, gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break and we'll continue our discussion on some really stay with a, with the monopoly. the semiconductor business would obviously be in taiwan with 80 percent of the market and going forward the need for diversity in the market is been screaming out loud for decades. but because of the vagaries of the money that allow for a concentration of power and well been collected, credit can of the cactus doc or c, the least qualified to rule market breakdown, supply chain breakdown and economic collab ah,

ah, the democratic republic of congo is among the richest countries in the world and natural resources, but he cannot mclee it's still one of the poorest cobalt is an essential material in manufacturing batteries for modern devices, like electric cars, mobile phones and computers. 60 percent of the world's cobalt reserves are in congo . 20 percent of it comes from small scale mines. units have figures confirm that in 2017. more than $40000.00 children worked in cobalt mining in the republic to earn a living and paying for schooling. next time you use a fancy gadget like a smartphone camera or laptop, and just remember that there's a chance it works thanks to a child hard labor children like john michelle henry at all countless others like them.

a welcome back to cross stock. were all things considered on people? well, this is the home addition to remind you. we're discussing some real issues. ah, okay, let's go back to make life a nickel. i mean, the, it's obvious that the, the post war post cold war order is unsustainable for russia. so if it's unsustainable for russia, why, why or why is it that it is a, an imaginal and beyond the bounds for them to stand up and say, look, you know, this is not working here. major expansion is creating more tensions, more instability. and we need to reassess it. why is there of this stubbornness in the west, particularly in the us? maybe you've already answered. i mean they, they want to maintain, had gemini and it works for us. so why should we change anything?

i mean, is that the mindset you alluded earlier to the wash and echo chamber people outside of washington, of beltway, really don't understand how deafening the echo chambers. you really cannot appreciate the interests of other nations in the same way that you listen to the competing interests within essentially the military industrial complex russian strategy is an interesting one. and it's a traditional one for powers that want to draw attention to their grievances. it's brinkman ship, they push to the edge believing that they have control over the situation and no, exactly how far they can go. the problem with brinkman ship, as we know historically, is that we don't,

although the actors in charge are not really in charge of everything. and then they get scared of the consequences of their own action and eventually backed out. in the mean time, sometimes they've learned something from this crisis and re address it as in the case of the cuban missile crisis. and sometimes they go blindly about their businesses. you haven't, even, i mean, i view is the m historical example of the cuban missile crisis and, and in this case we, it can be applied in reverse. i mean, you know, we, we had kennedy telling khrushchev, you know, if you don't take those missiles out, we will increase as well. cuba is a sovereign country, has right to have its own friends and alliances and all that. and then kennedy replied, if you don't take those missiles out, we will. is it an appropriate analogy? go ahead, i, but how, but, but a, go ahead. let's remember how that very quickly,

how that crisis actually got resolved. each side got what it really was. it eventually, administration one, the public relations war within the united states. and who show of god exactly what the soviet union wanted. the withdrawal of those missiles and establishment had been effective parity and recognition that parity between the united states and the so you know that it was the cuban missile crisis that created the soviet union as a superpower in america's mind. and after that, her things found down, okay, i mean, even if they could cuban missile crisis in reverse apps in this, in the situation. well, i think that, you know, that there are 2 very different, different crises, but i, it is a question whether that, whether people learn from these types of things. and i don't think banks midship ever gets anything because it's dangerous. i mean, maybe, you know, come out as we,

as everybody did in the cuban missile crisis, you know, and we didn't celebrate the world, but yeah, you know, it was sure scary. and i'm not sure if that's the way to go. right. and i think it's true, russia snap and listen to here, but i just don't think, you know, beating up on a smaller country or threatening a smaller country if you will. is really the problem problem is nato. and i think it really should, it, would they really need to negotiate this? and maybe this will be a heads up to nato that, well, maybe we should put ukraine in there. and that might be a good outcome. but getting there through this through these means is not, is not the correct way to do it. ok, but, but maximize well, how other, how other way to do it. i mean, russia's been wanting east word expansion of nato since the end of the cold war. and they've damira, you every single time saying, you know, this is not, this is not our interest. you're moving your alliance military lines to our borders

and of course was ignored. left right and center. and now we're at the rubicon and you can ignore it. now you're there. ok. i mean i don't see what other what other ways i mean write a letter to stilton burke and say please don't expand any more those days are long in the past if they were ever effective at all. go ahead. maxine, well, i think it was a 20 plus years presidency to try to find out why it's hard before a leader clinton, early a a he was talking to go to a day. ready or 210 slash isis coalition for russia went to syria, every single attempt to find common ground. and i think this is

a last attempt to try to find some common ground to secure russian perimeter. because, you know, we're talking russia do something with this means there are no means, but it will see at this point, everything else is the mind games. and the information worker was pretty much a any just yes except around and people are thinking some kind of scenarios and freaking out. and it's a similar, you know, like last year, one year for a 100 wagner guys in venezuela and people with guys capture or so this might happen. so i think there's a lot of history and a lot of you know, so i didn't know what to call it.

a response to the president promised is a serious thing. but it always considered as a last resort. if you know the west is not compelled to talk to me, rush introduced one, those are a to compel the west to talk to take or serious finally and be to deter ukrainian military from possibly a to fill those newspapers because they're not in their interest. well, we have to point out to the government chapter dumbass before and after $14000.00 casualties. so it's not unprecedented and is very pop. you know, they always talk about russia moving its own troops inside of its own country, but they never talk about ukraine moving its troops in it, within its own country to the point of contact. but again, i don't live in the bubble nichol. i mean, maybe it was made very clear. it's like

a fight for ukraine. so why wouldn't want ukraine is a member for it's are willing to fight for it. go ahead out. at present. no one is actually saying they watch ukraine as a member. it's more in the negative. if they insist, then maybe we should consider and, but i do agree that the agreement is likely on the fact that name that ukraine membership, great membership in nato is not in the cards for roughly 20 years. and by that time we'll have a lot of things will have changed. i do want to remind everyone in this context because we say we, we talk about war and diplomacy too much as if they. ready were opposite poles and they're not there really on a continuum. and plows of this reminds us of this with this famous phrase,

a war is a and extension or continuation of diplomacy. all the more. so the threat of war. and that i think is what is what we're seeing, that the perception of the threat is much greater in the west and the panicky response in the wes and i do have to simply professionally judge it as a panicky response. i'm really plays into rushes hats because they're the ones who will come out of this one way or another, appearing as are the more the com or the more seasoned. and the ones who really have a better grasp. one with the real situation is ivan ruin ivy, lin misprint with reply to that, because you know, the, the, one of the problems with this, when i call a propaganda campaign, is, and you can't keep this fever pitch going on indefinitely here. ok, there has to be some kind of resolution and, and the frustration that i see on this site is that there is still not been

a really meaningful, concrete reaction to the security of draft that they've been russia. and i've read them very reasonable things. are i mean, they're debatable but why it's off the table. you cannot consider these things because it's appeasement. and it's beyond a can, it's, you know, how do we get around that? because this is hysteria is, is getting in the way of reason. go ahead. i. well, i think the west says, well, we know we might negotiate, boat can't do with a gun to our head that's, that's the feeling here. and i, i share some of that a bit because i think that russia, if they de escalate it. 3 you know, put and could say, well, all the out, the outgoing situation here, but i want, you know, it, we better have meaningful discussions. and if, if that doesn't work, then i guess, you know, all bets are off but, but, you know, it's, there's no acute crisis here. this is been just come out of nowhere really. i mean,

of course it hasn't come out of nowhere because it has been decade of nato go going eastward, which is the route. i agree, it's rid of the problem, but i don't. what i don't agree with is that the way that this is being handle on, on the russian side, i don't think this is, there could have been many different ways of a back channel saying, you know, couldn't, could have said listen, you got to do something. and he said that, you, nick, he said that in munich in 2007, it's a pretty amazing speech. he said it already. he said it over and over and over again. you know, maxime rapidly running out of time. the so security is indivisible, that only applies to nato countries, doesn't it? it doesn't apply to russia. that's the implication that comes out of brussels every day. go ahead max. well, the, the think is a need to and the united states have shown to their actual, willing to discuss these russians for those because there have,

they have declined to us for years. this has to do with military diploma types of things. so these are actually the things are major were willing to discuss. but this is important, but to the secondary respond with georgia and major is what is important to you and discuss the com. the concept of it will security is key to further discussions. if a gentleman had a wonderful discussion, always to little time, want to thank my guess, washington things and, and in moscow, and i want to thank you for watching us the next time. remember, oh, these people learn from their own experience. how vulnerable

a business is to the bank. so you push my business over the age, pushes me right to the edge, bankruptcy. now i realize we will do. this isn't just the back that may be involved in this is the concept. see, is, is the lawyers, these people have got you want on their stories at a walk whistle blower, tell people's marriages have broken up and lost their family homes and it is spectacularly devastating people's lives in they have committed suicide, but left behind the explicitly state that it was the constant intimidation and billing by buying call for sauce that late them to i talked to spy obscene.